Prevalence and Antibiogram of Urinary Tract Infections in Renal Transplant Recipients at a Tertiary Care Hospital in North India.
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION
Although, urinary tract infections (UTI) remain the most common cause of mortality and morbidity in renal allograft recipients, there is scarce data from India on the etiology and antibiogram of UTI post kidney transplantation. Therefore, the current study was undertaken to evaluate the prevalence, etiology and the antibiogram of pathogens causing UTI in this cohort.
METHODS
Renal allograft recipients enrolled during the study period were screened for UTI by standard microscopy and routine culture on the day of admission and subsequently every 3rd day post-surgery till discharge. If UTI was present, the etiological agent and its antibiogram were recorded along with the demographic details of the patients.
RESULTS
The prevalence of UTI post-transplantation at our centre was 30%. E.coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae were the most common organisms isolated in 42% and 39% cases, respectively. Majority of patients developed UTI on Day 6 (36.6%) and Day 9 (36.6%) post-transplant. Our study revealed a high percentage of resistance to commonly used 1st and 2nd line antibiotics like third generation cephalosporins (96.6%), fluoroquinolones (96.6%), and aminoglycosides (56.7%) and carbapenems (55.2%).
CONCLUSION
Considering the high prevalence of UTI and antibiotic resistance rates in kidney transplant patients in our study, there is an urgent need for developing hospital based local antibiogram for appropriate management of UTI. Fosfomycin as an empirical therapy might be a useful choice for adequate coverage of potential pathogens at our centre. Further multi-centric studies on a larger sample size are recommended from India for formulating antibiotic policy.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.